Europe, Boring Until it's Not

[JohnDonne]

Wait. We can sanction Philly too?? Fuck yes. And LA, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Detroit, Boston, Seattle, Portland.. am I forgetting any den of villainy here?

Can you imagine the gloriousness of taxing the very people who pollute the most? The libs would shit their pants when they see that tax bill.

That's the irony of Macron's taxes. He taxes the people who pollute the least into economic ruin to boost the economic gains for the people who pollute the most.

He probably actually deserves the guillotine.

Urban centers are the worst polluters, they are dangerous to our world, we should be rid of them. By the logic of climate fuckery science legislation, anyone living in an urban area should be severely taxed for Climate Crimes

Negative, there is less pollution per capita in cities.

[C-Mag]

Wait. We can sanction Philly too?? Fuck yes. And LA, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Detroit, Boston, Seattle, Portland.. am I forgetting any den of villainy here?

Can you imagine the gloriousness of taxing the very people who pollute the most? The libs would shit their pants when they see that tax bill.

That's the irony of Macron's taxes. He taxes the people who pollute the least into economic ruin to boost the economic gains for the people who pollute the most.

He probably actually deserves the guillotine.

Urban centers are the worst polluters, they are dangerous to our world, we should be rid of them. By the logic of climate fuckery science legislation, anyone living in an urban area should be severely taxed for Climate Crimes

Negative, there is less pollution per capita in cities.

Not even worth a chuckle that's so silly
Cuyahoga River Fire - Cleveland

East River NYC

China urban pollution

Urban pollution in India


Air Pollution Map of the United States

[C-Mag]

Urban Centers absolutely DESTROY the natural environment, they displace or existnguish natural flora and fauna, almost all micro neutrients are destroyed. There is almost no Carbon storage, air and ground temps are raised, pollution is concentrated and trapped.

Entire Ecosystems are destroyed by Urban growth. Rivers and streams are sucked dry, polluted and native fisheries and aquatics are exterminated.

The pristine wilderness that was destroyed by urban growth and called the greater NYC area



By 1850 it had been completed clear cut and deforested, the air and waterways polluted



By the start of the 20th C, 1200 Metric Tons of Manure was on the streets daily, and 10's of thousands of gallons of urine, this was picked up and dumped in the water.


Air Pollution was so bad by the 70's that a new danger arouse, acid rain, or polluted rain water



Cities completely destroy the landscape, environment and ecosystem, leaving a pollution bloom that leaches into the surrounding environment for centuries.

[BjornP]

The UN has non business attacking Poland's production and use of coal while they sit silently and watch nearly uncontrolled coal use in China and India. It's asinine to punish well regulated and clean coal production and sit idly buy while other countries use coal with no controls.

How is the UN "punishing" Poland's coal production and use of coal, then? Are any UN sanctions currently in play to punish Poland's coal production? And if there were "UN sanctions"... you do know that "UN sanctions" aren't sanctions made by some UN government, right? UN sanctions would be sanctions made by the representatives of the sovereign, independent countries who make up the UN.

Not that there actually are any news saying that Poland is facing any sort of sanctions for using coal energy.

I'm not sure about specifics, but Polands President feels the need to state he is actively defending Polish right to self determination in regards to coal. https://news.yahoo.com/polish-president ... 58801.html

The UN is against self determination by nations, it increasingly wants to assume the decision making process for the world, telling everyone what's good for them. In South Africa, it's good to punish white farmers. In most of the Western world, you are obligated to take anyone we tell you to take into your country.

For me, this coal story is just another example of the UN subverting the independance and free will of nations globally.

The Polish president cannot guarantee the Polish public that *other* countries will buy Polish coal. His promise does not indicate that he is being sanctioned, and it would be a matter of public record if he was.

"Another" example of the UN subverting the independence and free will of nations? Ok, could you the preceding examples, then? I don't disagree with those who think the UN wastes alot of money on useless, often corrupt commitees (Human Rights Council, for example), but arguing that it's some sort of "globalist" organization is really nonsense. International institutions are not globalist simply by being international. Otherwise all attempts to work together with other countries is "globalist".

[C-Mag]

I'd start with South Africa. The UN approves and promotes land being taken away from White Farmers, and the UN supports those farmers being forced to pay for any loans even after the land is taken.

UN 'peacekeepers' are well known for sexual abuse and human trafficking, and then the UN gives those people cover, subverting host nations ability to properly punish the crimes.

[JohnDonne]

Urban centers are the worst polluters, they are dangerous to our world, we should be rid of them. By the logic of climate fuckery science legislation, anyone living in an urban area should be severely taxed for Climate Crimes

Negative, there is less pollution per capita in cities.

Not even worth a chuckle that's so silly
Cuyahoga River Fire - Cleveland

East River NYC

China urban pollution

Urban pollution in India


Air Pollution Map of the United States

I noticed you haven’t posted anything about the per capita pollution of big cities versus the average. Well, I looked but I couldn’t find any studies that give an obvious answer that weren’t contradicted by other analysis, there’s lots of variables. But I suspect the most densely crowded areas are more efficient and the suburbs give off more emissions.

[C-Mag]

I noticed you haven’t posted anything about the per capita pollution of big cities versus the average. Well, I looked but I couldn’t find any studies that give an obvious answer that weren’t contradicted by other analysis, there’s lots of variables. But I suspect the most densely crowded areas are more efficient and the suburbs give off more emissions.

You post it if that's where your argument lies.
But that's not how we look at environmental issues, it's in geographic area of pollution, concentration of pollutants, and cubic volume of pollutants.

NYC is 500 square miles of concentrated pollutants upon layer of pollutants over 350 years.

Doesn't the total destruction of Ecosystems mean anything to you ?
Do you think you can just ignore that level of pollution and environmental destruction on a per capita number ?

[Montegriffo]

I noticed you haven’t posted anything about the per capita pollution of big cities versus the average. Well, I looked but I couldn’t find any studies that give an obvious answer that weren’t contradicted by other analysis, there’s lots of variables. But I suspect the most densely crowded areas are more efficient and the suburbs give off more emissions.

You post it if that's where your argument lies.
But that's not how we look at environmental issues, it's in geographic area of pollution, concentration of pollutants, and cubic volume of pollutants.

NYC is 500 square miles of concentrated pollutants upon layer of pollutants over 350 years.

Doesn't the total destruction of Ecosystems mean anything to you ?
Do you think you can just ignore that level of pollution and environmental destruction on a per capita number ?

So what do you think would happen to your lovely pristine rural areas if all the people left the cities? Also, where would you get all the products you buy?
Cities don't kill the environment, people do.
I dislike big cities as much as the next man, I would never live in one, but to treat them as the root cause of all our woes is as dumb as blaming everything on globalism.
You need a new schtick Carlus, that one doesn't work.

[BjornP]

I'd start with South Africa. The UN approves and promotes land being taken away from White Farmers, and the UN supports those farmers being forced to pay for any loans even after the land is taken.

UN 'peacekeepers' are well known for sexual abuse and human trafficking, and then the UN gives those people cover, subverting host nations ability to properly punish the crimes.

So, you are against the UN dictating what countries can and cannot do, yet you also are chastising the UN for not "doing something" about the SA appropriating the land of white farmers? Which is it, then? But more importantly, of course, you're still not giving any evidence that "The UN approves of", or "promotes" the land of white SA farmers being confiscated? Who in the UN said that? The UN Secretary General? The UN Security Council, meaning the voice of sovereign, independent countries? Who? A quote or a document would be nice.

When you say "The UN supports", do you mean that the members of the UN, i.e. the sovereign, independent, countries of the world who make up the UN, supports land being taken away from white SA farmers? That the UN representative of say, Georgia, Russia, China, Sweden or Uzbekistan "support" the South African government taken away white farmers' land? Shouldn't sovereign, independent countries be allowed to have an opinion, even to the point of sanctioning, another country if they so choose? Or do you think it extremely unjust that the US persuaded other countries to sanction countries like Russia, Iran, North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba? Is that "subversion", too?

UN peacekeeping is authorized by the Security Council... meaning you, the United States, as well. It doesn't suit you to pretend you're powerless here.

[BjornP]

As for the other topic of rural vs urban pollution pr capita. Of course rural populations pollute more pr capita. You have to drive more to get your essentials in a rural geography than you would need to in a city.

Yet what conclusion are we to draw from that fact? That if only rural populations had more supermarkets and malls next to where they live, they wouldn't need to consume so much fuel; everything they needed would be within walking distance? Oh... that's great.. sooo.. the solution to rural populations polluting so much is to turn farmland and forests into cities. Great plan, that... sure that will do loads of good for the environment.